I don't know for you guys, but I prefer a NASCAR race on Infineon raceway, with about 5 passes per lap over any F1 race since a good lot of years with no passes on track at all. NASCAR go way slower on a road circuit, yes, and the pilots probably not as experimented on road tracks, but to me, NASCAR racing on road courses is way more interesting than an F1 race. 
The fact is, it's definitely not a good idea to allow a community to modify an online game. It gets the game just way too much worthless crap.
Can you imagine what would happen? With the OOS errors, you can't connect to a server unless you have exactly the same version of the game, and that is down to the last line of code, and the last pixel of the models. Not only it would be awful because of lack of quality, it would also be full of useless servers and annoying errors.
The only way to have mods integrated to LFS is to get professionals to make it, and implant it as an expansion pack. The servers get a tag that shows they have the pack or no, and depending if you have it, you can play on it or no.
Can you imagine what would happen? With the OOS errors, you can't connect to a server unless you have exactly the same version of the game, and that is down to the last line of code, and the last pixel of the models. Not only it would be awful because of lack of quality, it would also be full of useless servers and annoying errors.
The only way to have mods integrated to LFS is to get professionals to make it, and implant it as an expansion pack. The servers get a tag that shows they have the pack or no, and depending if you have it, you can play on it or no.
People that say that they need about 80 fps to even be able to drive are making me laugh. You don't need more than 25 or 30 fps to drive without a flaw. Under that, MAYBE you'll have some trouble, and that's if you're not used to it.
Personally, anything over 25 fps is fine. People with 120 fps don't gain much experience in 100 fps.
As for Dx8, 9 or even 10, I think that by the time LFS S3 is out, Dx10 will be widely spread and most cards sold will be Dx10 cards, unlike now. We're in a period of transition. What's sure is that newcomers with brand new Dx10 setups will probably laugh at a game that still uses Dx8.
That said, I really feel that an engine change or upgrade is out of question until LFS S3 is out, and that's of course because Scawen just doesn't have time alone to do that. It wouldn't be a smart move to work on a new engine for an X amount of time and let the rest rot in the to-do list. So basically, LFS is getting even more screwed the more time passes... 2007 already! :o
Personally, anything over 25 fps is fine. People with 120 fps don't gain much experience in 100 fps.
As for Dx8, 9 or even 10, I think that by the time LFS S3 is out, Dx10 will be widely spread and most cards sold will be Dx10 cards, unlike now. We're in a period of transition. What's sure is that newcomers with brand new Dx10 setups will probably laugh at a game that still uses Dx8.
That said, I really feel that an engine change or upgrade is out of question until LFS S3 is out, and that's of course because Scawen just doesn't have time alone to do that. It wouldn't be a smart move to work on a new engine for an X amount of time and let the rest rot in the to-do list. So basically, LFS is getting even more screwed the more time passes... 2007 already! :o
Actually, I don't think that even Need For Speed games would have an option to actually repair the car on reset. I don't really know why this has even be brought up. It's totally not realistic, so bad for cruising servers, and even worse for racing servers. I mean, you flipped the car; why would you have the right to continue with only that penalty? No way, sir, the car's dead, crawl your way back to pits at 10kph.
As far as I know, CLIS2, the insim program that will be used for the patch X on CLC server intends to have reset: off. It will probably not be that you lose your car if you have to pit anymore, but you get fined for money instead, resolving the problem.
Yes, it's probably the gear whine, and no it's not wrong, it's normal. The M3 GTR that you have in your avatar has that noise, and it's probably even louder than anything we have in LFS :P
As Maggot said, it's possible to adjust that in the SHIFT+A panel.
As Maggot said, it's possible to adjust that in the SHIFT+A panel.
People already vote without thinking. The point I'm trying to say is that there's nothing in the current vote system that stops people to vote for no reason, and there's nothing ever that will stop that; there's just some people that are idiots. The fact is, people hate the 50+1 system because it spams, not because it's hard to ban. If somebody really deserves a ban, it's 100% sure that he'll get it with 50%+1; why would we need a system that only requires 8 people? Just because it spams too much on your chat panel.
Besides, I don't think anybody really gives a damn who is voting. There's a vote, a ban, done, people don't go back and see how voted. Anyway, a 50+1 system avoid pretty much any situation where a ban is given that is not deserved, unless there's pretty much only idiots on the server, which only happens with only a few people on.
Besides, I don't think anybody really gives a damn who is voting. There's a vote, a ban, done, people don't go back and see how voted. Anyway, a 50+1 system avoid pretty much any situation where a ban is given that is not deserved, unless there's pretty much only idiots on the server, which only happens with only a few people on.
How about just making it 50% +1 silent vote? Let's say somebody wants another guy banned. He clicks on the ban button, you get the same message that you get at the moment. If you press [1], you get a message notifying you that your message has been counted. If you don't get 50% +1, the vote cancels after a while, if you do, the guy gets banned.
Even making an option to show or hide the banning text. The thing people don't like about 50% +1 vote is not the number of vote needed, it's the amount of spam that it creates on one's chat panel. Democratically speaking, the 8 vote ban is a total joke, in my opinion. There should really be 50% +1.
edit: just to add a bit to my argument. Let's say that there are 40 people present on a said server. Somebody commits an act that "could" get him banned, but it's hard to tell; people have to choose what they want to do with it. There are 40 people on the server, 21 vote against ban, 19 vote for it. There you go, banned, the system is flawed. I don't care whatever other people will say, the fact remains that this system is wrong, it doesn't take in consideration what a majority will say.
edit2: I've just been banned from a server for absolutely no reason at all! Proof that morons do exist: I'm looking for a server, choose one, it's called 1FT LFSLA.NET CEROLAG.COM. Connect, there are only two other people on the server, I had time to go to the pits, choose a car, and join the race before they actually chose to ban me for no reason. I have never been on this server, nor have I ever seen those two persons before (I've already forgotten their names, in fact). This is just a proof that YES there are morons playing this game, and that YES, they will blindly press 1 when they get the chance. 8 vote bans is just making it easier for them.
Even making an option to show or hide the banning text. The thing people don't like about 50% +1 vote is not the number of vote needed, it's the amount of spam that it creates on one's chat panel. Democratically speaking, the 8 vote ban is a total joke, in my opinion. There should really be 50% +1.
edit: just to add a bit to my argument. Let's say that there are 40 people present on a said server. Somebody commits an act that "could" get him banned, but it's hard to tell; people have to choose what they want to do with it. There are 40 people on the server, 21 vote against ban, 19 vote for it. There you go, banned, the system is flawed. I don't care whatever other people will say, the fact remains that this system is wrong, it doesn't take in consideration what a majority will say.
edit2: I've just been banned from a server for absolutely no reason at all! Proof that morons do exist: I'm looking for a server, choose one, it's called 1FT LFSLA.NET CEROLAG.COM. Connect, there are only two other people on the server, I had time to go to the pits, choose a car, and join the race before they actually chose to ban me for no reason. I have never been on this server, nor have I ever seen those two persons before (I've already forgotten their names, in fact). This is just a proof that YES there are morons playing this game, and that YES, they will blindly press 1 when they get the chance. 8 vote bans is just making it easier for them.
Last edited by boosterfire, .
Anyway, putting a huge engine in a car without changing any other components is bound to be disastrous. We have the FZR already, which is what you expect from a faster FZ5; faster, with grip. FZ5 turbocharged without all the FZR stuff = gone in the grass.
That simple screen looks better than LFS's menu...
NNooooooo nevermind, I said nothing
Microsoft SideWinder Precision Racing Wheel; a study
Ah, yes! I've picked up one of these from my father. I was playing with mouse so far, and to be honest, after what I've been trough to try set up the thing, I'll probably go back to it.
Here's the thing, I have the wheel, it's in very good condition, nothing is broke, pedals and wheel aren't squeaking, physically it's perfect. So I install it on my desk, plug the pedals into the wheel the wheel itself into the computer via a USB port. I turn on the computer, it detects the new hardware, successfully "installs" it, says it's ready for use, no problem so far. At that point (I discovered that later), I could have just left it like this, pop up LFS and play, the only problem being that the brake and throttle are on the same axis, hardly what you'd call playable in LFS.
Anyway, I didn't do that, I just tried to install the MS Sidewinder drivers 4.0! First thing, you have to find the thing, which takes a good 15 minutes of searching trough the sub forum of the most sub forums of the net! After downloading these, I install the thing; problem : can't access the window that would have permitted me to separate the axis.
After a while, I discovered that the wheel being a no FF, I had to download another zip file, that even if it looks the same, doesn't have the same effect at all. So I install this other driver, access separate axis function, checks it, go into LFS only to find that it created another problem. At that point, the axis were indeed separated, but they pedals didn't react as pedals anymore, just as keyboard keys (full or nothing). The wheel itself was also IMPOSSIBLE to calibrate.
And that's how far I go, I have two "working options":
1. No drivers installed, the wheel is calibrated perfectly, but the brake and throttle are on the same axis.
2. Those drivers that allow me to separate the axis, but screw up the calibration and ability to gauge power on brake and throttle axis.
This obviously doesn't happen for no reason: windows discontinued the wheel in 2003 and haven't bothered making drivers that would make it compatible with XP (and subsequently Vista). The other problem I encounter is that it seems all "work arounds" only work with the FF version of the wheel. To be honest, I think I've reach the bottom of the tank, but I'd still like to ask it here (I've been tempted to post something here all day, in fact); does anybody know anything I don't? And does anybody own a Microsoft SideWinder Precision Racing Wheel (no FF) that is currently fully working with LFS?
Thanks
P.S. I have indeed used the search function, and I know that there are already a couple of subject on this matter, but I just feel like they're either not answering anything, or only concerning the non FF version of the wheel.
Here's the thing, I have the wheel, it's in very good condition, nothing is broke, pedals and wheel aren't squeaking, physically it's perfect. So I install it on my desk, plug the pedals into the wheel the wheel itself into the computer via a USB port. I turn on the computer, it detects the new hardware, successfully "installs" it, says it's ready for use, no problem so far. At that point (I discovered that later), I could have just left it like this, pop up LFS and play, the only problem being that the brake and throttle are on the same axis, hardly what you'd call playable in LFS.
Anyway, I didn't do that, I just tried to install the MS Sidewinder drivers 4.0! First thing, you have to find the thing, which takes a good 15 minutes of searching trough the sub forum of the most sub forums of the net! After downloading these, I install the thing; problem : can't access the window that would have permitted me to separate the axis.
After a while, I discovered that the wheel being a no FF, I had to download another zip file, that even if it looks the same, doesn't have the same effect at all. So I install this other driver, access separate axis function, checks it, go into LFS only to find that it created another problem. At that point, the axis were indeed separated, but they pedals didn't react as pedals anymore, just as keyboard keys (full or nothing). The wheel itself was also IMPOSSIBLE to calibrate.
And that's how far I go, I have two "working options":
1. No drivers installed, the wheel is calibrated perfectly, but the brake and throttle are on the same axis.
2. Those drivers that allow me to separate the axis, but screw up the calibration and ability to gauge power on brake and throttle axis.
This obviously doesn't happen for no reason: windows discontinued the wheel in 2003 and haven't bothered making drivers that would make it compatible with XP (and subsequently Vista). The other problem I encounter is that it seems all "work arounds" only work with the FF version of the wheel. To be honest, I think I've reach the bottom of the tank, but I'd still like to ask it here (I've been tempted to post something here all day, in fact); does anybody know anything I don't? And does anybody own a Microsoft SideWinder Precision Racing Wheel (no FF) that is currently fully working with LFS?
Thanks
P.S. I have indeed used the search function, and I know that there are already a couple of subject on this matter, but I just feel like they're either not answering anything, or only concerning the non FF version of the wheel.
Last edited by boosterfire, .
Mate, I totally agree with you.
edit: No! Don't remove it, I need my daily makefunofanoob! And now I look like an idiot ;P
Seriously, you just don't have any idea how I don't want to upload everybody's 26 laps race replay and watch it. I feel like I'm not the only one, either. 
This matter is highly subjective. Yes, working with a small team is good in some way, as you just don't have other people to merge code with, or whatever, but it also brings numerous problems, the biggest being obviously that it cannot be as fast. It applies to everything, not only program developing.
What's interesting about that is that we've never ever seen something that we could call the perfect middle. It's either too slow, or either crappy because it was done by too many people. The day that a very dedicated team of, say, 40 or 50 people will do work as if they'd be 5, something might top LFS. Look at all the other things, they've all been produced by a huge team, and I personally get the feeling that they've tried to finish them as fast as possible.
I'm not saying he doesn't care what we think. I'm saying he doesn't bother telling us what he's working on, and that, whatever anybody can come up with, is not a good marketing strategy.
I know that LFS's goal isn't to sell copies like crazy, but to actually make a good sim, but I still don't understand how "not saying anything to the users" is a good marketing thing. I mean, you WANT your users to know what the hell is going on, it's just basic. If you don't tell them, they get pissed, and eventually make this kind of post every month. It's not surprising that this kind of posts come up.
I just can't conceive that fanbois, who are supposed to be people who care the most about LFS good development, can continue to believe as hard as they can in this system.
I just can't conceive that fanbois, who are supposed to be people who care the most about LFS good development, can continue to believe as hard as they can in this system.
I think it's just too soon to tell. We have no idea what Eric has been doing in the past year. We're just assuming that he's not done much because we never heard of it, but we might (I hope) be surprised and actually get quite a lot of content in patch Y.
Still, if there's nothing else than a new SC and car interiors... I'll be sad, it's not what you'd call a lot for a whole year.
Still, if there's nothing else than a new SC and car interiors... I'll be sad, it's not what you'd call a lot for a whole year.
From that screenshot Jason just posted, I just feel more like I will never buy that service. There are numerous reasons to that:
1. I don't feel like it will make such a difference when actually racing. The LOD being already decreased when you're far from another car, having a 1024* skin only gives the good looks for a closer look, which is something that happens 5% of the time in LFS.
2. Again from that screenshot, I don't see why I'd pay for 1024 skins while 2048 is better anyway, it's like being a midrange computer when you perfectly know it'll be crap compared to what you could get. You'd have to pay hundreds more to get the high range computer, but even if you pay twice the current price for 2048 skins, it's still cheap.
3. That has brought up by seinfield and it's quite true: the graphics in LFS aren't really what I'd personally call awesome, I don't see what difference it'll make to put higher resolution skins in there.
4. There's a lot of people that have nice looking skins now, but I don't see why I'd pay to see a higher resolution image of a crappy skin, and there are still quite a lot.
I mean, you're not forced to buy it, and there's not a huge difference between both options. I guess it just falls down to personal opinion...
1. I don't feel like it will make such a difference when actually racing. The LOD being already decreased when you're far from another car, having a 1024* skin only gives the good looks for a closer look, which is something that happens 5% of the time in LFS.
2. Again from that screenshot, I don't see why I'd pay for 1024 skins while 2048 is better anyway, it's like being a midrange computer when you perfectly know it'll be crap compared to what you could get. You'd have to pay hundreds more to get the high range computer, but even if you pay twice the current price for 2048 skins, it's still cheap.
3. That has brought up by seinfield and it's quite true: the graphics in LFS aren't really what I'd personally call awesome, I don't see what difference it'll make to put higher resolution skins in there.
4. There's a lot of people that have nice looking skins now, but I don't see why I'd pay to see a higher resolution image of a crappy skin, and there are still quite a lot.
I mean, you're not forced to buy it, and there's not a huge difference between both options. I guess it just falls down to personal opinion...
Last edited by boosterfire, .
Money is useless, yes, because they wouldn't spend it to get more people working on it. They do their work as they intend to and it's probably never going to change.
I don't really think that we really influence them at all. I mean, they know what we want, and they know what we think is not right, but I think most of our suggestions are left without answer, and that's kind of normal considering it's only, say, half of the community that thinks something is wrong.
edit: and by the way, I don't really think this topic is the same than "how time flies". At least, it's not intended to be. The topic name is different, at least. Personally, I don't think that we can call LFS too ambitious, because what's planned will probably be done eventually. Just calling it too slow would be better. You have to face the truth, eventually. LFS is on top now, and as far as most people know, there's nothing new that seems like the next gen sim, but it cannot stay like that eternally. It's just not possible, really.
If you can confirm it, and especially if patch Y can confirm this, I'll be the first to go out there and enjoy that new content. I understand that Erik has to wait for an incompatible patch. I hope, and somehow believe that he did work, but you have to admit that leaving us clueless isn't actually the best thing to do.
Again, I might seem to contradict myself, but I believe that he's been working. There's just a part of me that tends to believe only what I see, and this part is telling me that I've seen nothing for a year.
Well, I think it will actually be an odd thing to see a post that supports Ian, but I do. I support the mild fanboys too. I've been playing LFS since version 0.something of the demo version. I'm playing it less now than I used to, but I'm still playing it. I've posted a pretty high number of posts where I complain about the development of LFS, and I still think that it's flawed, but as today, I don't think I'll just stop playing.
I'm still playing other old games too. The kind of games that were once considered top notch and that are now... well just old games that you play once in a while because, after all, they're still good.
The problem is that I shouldn't really feel that way about LFS. I don't feel like there has been much change over the years. It's still the same thing. I'm enjoying it, yes, but I'm not enjoying it than I did, while I believe I should if there was constant new content.
About the graphic issue, I tend to agree with Tweak and Ian. I just can't conceive how you fanboys don't actually feel bad when you see that Erik didn't give us anything for a year now. While we've not paid for the final product, we've paid for the progress, and it would be nice to see something done about the graphics. I mean, the patch with the new astons and the BF1 was nice, it had numerous graphical upgrades. What would be good is to have those kind of upgrades in every patch. I'm not asking for a whole new graphical engine, just upgrades in every patch. I'll be greatly dissapointed if patch Y doesn't bring more than new interiors and a new south city. These are obviously needed, but do we have to believe that Erik did nothing else in a year?
I know! My post is useless. The devs are untouchable, and with their army of fanboys, there's just no way we come to the agreement that Erik is a schlow poke. Face the thruth, come on. Another thing: people saying that the graphics are fine as is. Same thing applies to the people who say that physics » graphics. When you're driving a car, you don't only feel the road. You see it, graphics and physics are one, they're the impression of reality. You could give near-reality physics to a game like NFS 2 and you'd have the same problem that LFS has, it would just be extreme. The current LFS graphics are crap. The current LFS physics, even if they're the best currently available on the market, are FAR from something close to perfection. It doesn't mean that it's not fun, tho.
I'm still playing other old games too. The kind of games that were once considered top notch and that are now... well just old games that you play once in a while because, after all, they're still good.
The problem is that I shouldn't really feel that way about LFS. I don't feel like there has been much change over the years. It's still the same thing. I'm enjoying it, yes, but I'm not enjoying it than I did, while I believe I should if there was constant new content.
About the graphic issue, I tend to agree with Tweak and Ian. I just can't conceive how you fanboys don't actually feel bad when you see that Erik didn't give us anything for a year now. While we've not paid for the final product, we've paid for the progress, and it would be nice to see something done about the graphics. I mean, the patch with the new astons and the BF1 was nice, it had numerous graphical upgrades. What would be good is to have those kind of upgrades in every patch. I'm not asking for a whole new graphical engine, just upgrades in every patch. I'll be greatly dissapointed if patch Y doesn't bring more than new interiors and a new south city. These are obviously needed, but do we have to believe that Erik did nothing else in a year?
I know! My post is useless. The devs are untouchable, and with their army of fanboys, there's just no way we come to the agreement that Erik is a schlow poke. Face the thruth, come on. Another thing: people saying that the graphics are fine as is. Same thing applies to the people who say that physics » graphics. When you're driving a car, you don't only feel the road. You see it, graphics and physics are one, they're the impression of reality. You could give near-reality physics to a game like NFS 2 and you'd have the same problem that LFS has, it would just be extreme. The current LFS graphics are crap. The current LFS physics, even if they're the best currently available on the market, are FAR from something close to perfection. It doesn't mean that it's not fun, tho.
By the way, st.jovite is actually a fake name to avoid confusion. The tourists that came from USA and other parts of Canada were apparently confused with the name. The track is actually in the town of Mont Tremblant, St-Jovite being another town. 
I agree, it definietly isn't fan friendly, say, as the Gilles-Villeneuve track is, but that actually adds a bit to it, imo. I wouldn't see it with huge stands all around it.
I agree, it definietly isn't fan friendly, say, as the Gilles-Villeneuve track is, but that actually adds a bit to it, imo. I wouldn't see it with huge stands all around it.
Maybe... I shouldn't post in this topic, but oh well...
What you need to realize when talking about this issue is that it's a general issue well known in LFS. The problem is not the barrier themselves, as the problem of the damage system is not the cars, but the way they interract between each other. It's the same thing with anything that has to do with collision in LFS.
The obvious thing that doesn't work at the moment is that you can actually get into those barriers, which is, well... quite impossible. However, you can't actually fix the barrier problem without fixing the collision system, they come together. Imagine what would happen if you wouldn't enter in the barriers and bounce back like it is at the moment: the true thing would be that your car would pretty much disintegrate (considering it's a high speed crash), but that cannot be unless you've got a respectable collision system/damage system.
It should come eventually
edit: And by the way, I believe that the less you post over a long ammount of time, the best the posts are
What you need to realize when talking about this issue is that it's a general issue well known in LFS. The problem is not the barrier themselves, as the problem of the damage system is not the cars, but the way they interract between each other. It's the same thing with anything that has to do with collision in LFS.
The obvious thing that doesn't work at the moment is that you can actually get into those barriers, which is, well... quite impossible. However, you can't actually fix the barrier problem without fixing the collision system, they come together. Imagine what would happen if you wouldn't enter in the barriers and bounce back like it is at the moment: the true thing would be that your car would pretty much disintegrate (considering it's a high speed crash), but that cannot be unless you've got a respectable collision system/damage system.
It should come eventually
edit: And by the way, I believe that the less you post over a long ammount of time, the best the posts are
As a mouse driver, I display the wheel and driver. I don't get the feedback from the fb, or even the actual angle at which I'm turning, so displaying this gives me an idea of the angle of the wheels. You'd be surprised how different it is to drive with the mouse.
That said, I'm not totally sure this is useful. As mrodgers said, you most people wouldn't use it. I, for one, wouldn't mind seeing the driving shift, but I'd rather see other kind of changes made before this; it's not really needed to reach the point of the game, which is realism driving.
That said, I'm not totally sure this is useful. As mrodgers said, you most people wouldn't use it. I, for one, wouldn't mind seeing the driving shift, but I'd rather see other kind of changes made before this; it's not really needed to reach the point of the game, which is realism driving.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG